Is it just me, or is there a certain parallel between the hipster and the nerd? Both groups stereotypically have an anally-retentive attention to detail, usually with regards to things other people couldn't give a toss about and have often not even heard of; a desire to stay ahead of the game in terms of current developments, be it in a musical micro-scene or internet culture and technology (coupled, paradoxically, with an obsession with all things retro) and, as people have mentioned, the fact that people who would be described by others as a hipster/nerd usually do not identify themselves as such. In fact, anyone who calls themselves a nerd is probably a hipster trying to appropriate nerd culture or 'geek chic' (the dorky rectangular glasses, woolen cardigan, tweed jacket...), which seems to be a whole look by itself these days.

"Arguably techno hipsters are a different breed than indie rock hipsters, but people like Matthew Dear would be partially in both camps"

I think that I meant something other than the different types of music that people might listen to though - what I mean is that if, as you suggest and I would tend to agree, some defining features of hipsterdom are being "an early adopter of culture and music" (or at least, I would say, being aware of things early but often being too cool to adopt them) and placing "a great amount of worth in subcultural minutiae" then that description could definitely apply to K-Punk as well as the new-rave kids of Hoxton, but from that common basis they seem to continue in very different directions.

Ah, well then there's the difference between nerds and geeks, which I've never actually understood myself. Is there a meaningful difference between the terms? How do you differentiate between people who attend Star Trek conventions and people who can quote entire Kevin Smith movies?

I think the difference between K-Punk and our increasingly stereotypical young 20 something from a trendy area in London/New York/Paris/Berlin/LA is that we trade heavily in the cultural signs and signifiers of cool, while he analyzes from a distance. Its the process of constantly keeping the fashionable at arms reach, cherry picking only the most hyper fashionable that gives a hipster power.

It also tends to make the majority of us look and act ridiculously a large percentage of the time.

Is it just me, or is there a certain parallel between the hipster and the nerd? Both groups stereotypically have an anally-retentive attention to detail, usually with regards to things other people couldn't give a toss about and have often not even heard of; a desire to stay ahead of the game in terms of current developments, be it in a musical micro-scene or internet culture and technology (coupled, paradoxically, with an obsession with all things retro) and, as people have mentioned, the fact that people who would be described by others as a hipster/nerd usually do not identify themselves as such. In fact, anyone who calls themselves a nerd is probably a hipster trying to appropriate nerd culture or 'geek chic' (the dorky rectangular glasses, woolen cardigan, tweed jacket...), which seems to be a whole look by itself these days.

I think they're the opposite, really. A nerd (if I'm right in conflating 'nerd' & 'geek') doesn't give a shit about what people think about him, hiding in personal obsession at the expense of status games. It's self-conscious outsiderism. 'Hipsters', according to every definition above, are interested in subcultures principally as a status game. It's self-conscious insiderism. Their very LACK of obsession, of real personal engagement, is their main characteristic & seems to be the principal argument the self-proclaimed 'real' give against their 'right' to engage with the subcultures they toy with.

Is it just me, or is there a certain parallel between the hipster and the nerd? Both groups stereotypically have an anally-retentive attention to detail, usually with regards to things other people couldn't give a toss about and have often not even heard of; a desire to stay ahead of the game in terms of current developments, be it in a musical micro-scene or internet culture and technology (coupled, paradoxically, with an obsession with all things retro) and, as people have mentioned, the fact that people who would be described by others as a hipster/nerd usually do not identify themselves as such. In fact, anyone who calls themselves a nerd is probably a hipster trying to appropriate nerd culture or 'geek chic' (the dorky rectangular glasses, woolen cardigan, tweed jacket...), which seems to be a whole look by itself these days.

Nah. Hipsters are poseurs who self consciously flit from one cultural meme to another, consuming on a superficial level in a desperate attempt to appear ahead of the game.

Nerds are obsessives who tend to be involved with their fields of interest at some creative level and steadfastly stick to their passions, whatever they may be, regardless of fashion - bless em.

Though there is crossover. With nerds trying to be hip, and hipsters posing as nerds, but there is a fundamental difference - Hipsters go out and party at the weekend, Nerds sit in front of a computer/sampler/whatever.

As for the whole geek/nerd thing. The difference is fully explained in my fanzine.

I think they're the opposite, really. A nerd (if I'm right in conflating 'nerd' & 'geek') doesn't give a shit about what people think about him, hiding in personal obsession at the expense of status games. It's self-conscious outsiderism. 'Hipsters', according to every definition above, are interested in subcultures principally as a status game. It's self-conscious insiderism. Their very LACK of obsession, of real personal engagement, is their main characteristic & seems to be the principal argument the self-proclaimed 'real' give against their 'right' to engage with the subcultures they toy with.

Yes, opposite in some ways, but in other ways closer than you might think. Everyone knows nerds are unfashionable, but wouldn't a truly dedicated hipster (if there is any such thing?*) take pleasure from knowing that Mr. and Mrs. Normal look at him and think "What the fuck?"? Nerds might be 'outsiders', but there is often a fierce sense of belonging, even cliquishness, within their own social groups.

*this might be worth expanding on: I suppose I'm talking about people who put a hell of a lot of effort into looking and acting like they don't give a shit about anything. And when this gets too obvious, we say someone looks like they're "trying a bit too hard", which I imagine would be a devastating put-down to any true hipster.

Well just like any subcultural niche, particularly one that is as marketed to as heavily as mine (or ours) I think hipsters definitely can be split into further subgroups.

Arguably techno hipsters are a different breed than indie rock hipsters, but people like Matthew Dear would be partially in both camps.

I'm a kind of scuzzy looking man in my mid-twenties, with facial hair and pseudo military looking clothes so I think I qualify for the look and the uniform.

(I wear a lot of A Kurtz and designer skate clothes, if that helps).

I DJ dubstep, techno and house and recently a little disco, so I definitely think that qualifies. But maybe this is all just a description of my micro micro niche.

Hmm, I thought that this was all about the nu-rave / shoreditch twat / trucker cap / media mullet axis. It's not just about early adoption, there's a sense of decontextualization and stripping things of (their original) subcultural meanings. I've seen a few DJs at nights I'd associate with that sort of scene, and the mix of music was what you might call blogline - odds and sods of bassline, dubstep, crunk, old rave, nu rave, hyphy, garage, grime, jungle - mostly decent tunes, and all fairly obvious big anthems of their respective scenes, but the whole thing got a bit directionless after a while because the sets didn't have the context and inter-connected web of significance that you'd get from a pure jungle set or a pure grime set.

It seems kind of different from the traditional idea of white hipsters being obsessive about black / urban culture in that there doesn't seem to be the interest in the cultural nuances and the original context and in that it's a lot more eclectic and less into rarity and obscurity - most of the tunes I heard are actually ones that your mum would recognize, or at least that anyone with a cursory familiarity with the genre would consider a bit obvious.

I dunno if there is a sort of new context / new significance being stuck into the tune by hipster / scene culture or whether it's pure surface. I guess it could be interesting either way, but tbh it mostly gets on my tits. Maybe I'm going rockist, but taking a tune that's come out of some sort of urban struggle subculture and treating it as a mostly decontextualized piece of pure pop sonics for (normally fairly privileged, mostly white suburban) fashionistas makes me uneasy.

"Their very LACK of obsession, of real personal engagement, is their main characteristic & seems to be the principal argument the self-proclaimed 'real' give against their 'right' to engage with the subcultures they toy with."

I was waiting to see if anyone would mention "realness" as it seems that usually one of the main things people define hipsters by is a lack of it relative to the purer and more genuine true fans. Surprised that idea took so long to pop up here to be honest. I think you're definitely right to use the scare-quotes as much as possible though - how does one define "realness" and, even if you can, how do you extend that to telling which people are real and which aren't?